Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0
On the first day of his second term, President Trump suspended all entries at the U.S. Southern Border for asylum seekers. Since then, the Administration has implemented sweeping restrictions that shut America’s doors to people fleeing persecution. These policies violate federal law, erode constitutionally protected due process, exacerbate the asylum backlog, and give those seeking safety an increasingly narrow path to protection.
Left unchecked by Congress, these policies will have dire consequences for both asylum seekers and the integrity of our legal system. Asylum seekers—especially those without access to counsel—are at grave risk of being returned to harm.
It doesn’t have to be this way. The Administration can maintain order at U.S. borders and effectively manage migration without sacrificing fairness and adherence to the law. With more trained asylum officers, a streamlined legal process, legal representation for asylum seekers, and more effective coordination between relevant agencies, the U.S. can establish a safe, orderly, and humane asylum system.
Browse the Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0 collection
CA8 Upholds BIA’s Denial of Asylum to Nigerian Petitioner Who Supported the Biafran State
The court denied the petition for review, holding that the BIA did not exceed its authority by ruling that the petitioner did not meet his burden of proof with corroborating evidence for his claimed fear of future harm in Nigeria on account of political opinion. (Uzodinma v. Barr, 3/5/20)
CA9 Grants Partial Injunction, Blocking Remain in Mexico in Ninth Circuit Jurisdiction Starting on March 12
The court stopped implementation of RIM inside the Ninth Circuit jurisdiction, but will wait until 3/12/20 for its order to take effect to see "if the Supreme Court has not in the meantime acted to reverse or otherwise modify our decision." (Innovation Law Lab et al., v. Wolf, 3/4/20)
Senators Raise Concerns That DHS-Operated "Tent Courts" Violate Asylum Seekers' Due Process Rights
On 3/3/20, Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), and Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) sent a letter to DOJ and DHS raising concerns about the lack of access to appropriate legal services and lack of transparency at DHS-operated "tent courts" at the U.S.-Mexico border.
District Court Suspended Two Asylum Policies After Finding Ken Cuccinelli’s Appointment Violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act
The government dismissed its appeal of a district court’s ruling that the Trump administration had illegally appointed Ken Cuccinelli to serve as the acting director of USCIS and that two immigration directives issued by him were “invalid.” (L.M.-M., et al., v. Cuccinelli, 8/13/20)
CA3 Finds Circumstances Surrounding Threats of Violence to Nicaraguan Petitioner Established Cumulative Pattern of Past Persecution
Where the petitioner, the leader of a political opposition group in Nicaragua, had been subjected to a pattern of threatening words and conduct by the ruling party, the court found she had suffered past persecution, even in the absence of physical harm. (Herrera-Reyes v. Att’y Gen., 2/28/20)
New Rule Seems Designed to Halt Valid Immigration Court Petitions By Drastically Hiking Fees
AILA expressed serious concerns about a new proposed rule that would detrimentally impact individuals seeking a fair day in immigration court by drastically increasing fees required for forms submitted to EOIR.
CA9 Lifted Emergency Stay and Affirmed District Court Preliminary Injunction of MPP
The court affirmed a district court’s grant of a preliminary injunction setting aside the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), lifting the emergency stay imposed by the motions panel. (Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf, 2/28/20)
CA9 Affirms District Court’s Preliminary Injunction of Interim Final Rule on Asylum Claims at the Southern Border
The court affirmed a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of a rule and presidential proclamation that strip asylum eligibility from every migrant who enters between designated ports of entry on the southern U.S. border. (East Bay Sanctuary Covenant et al. v. Trump, 2/28/20)
Ninth Circuit Defends Asylum in Two Rulings
AILA welcomed two Ninth Circuit decisions; one again halts the “Migrant Protection Protocols,” and the second ensures that the administration cannot block someone from seeking asylum solely due to where they presented themselves, either at a port of entry or elsewhere within the United States.
CBP Responds to Letter Regarding Concerns over Truncated Asylum Programs Being Piloted in El Paso, TX
CBP responded to a letter from Representative Veronica Escobar (D-TX) that expressed concerns over two new programs, PACR and HARP, that subject vulnerable individuals to truncated asylum review processes. CBP's letter reveals new details about the operation and application of both programs.
EOIR Proposed Rule Increasing Fees for Filings
EOIR proposed rule increasing the filing fees for forms and motions filed with EOIR. Comments are due 3/30/20. (85 FR 11866, 2/28/20)
Attorney General Refers Case to Himself and Then Vacates Board’s Decision on Definition of “Torture”
The AG vacated the BIA’s decision granting deferral of removal under CAT and remanded for review, noting that the BIA should consider de novo respondent’s claim that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured upon return to Mexico. Matter of R-A-F-, 27 I&N Dec. 778 (A.G. 2020)
CA4 Finds BIA Failed to Rebut Future-Threat Presumption Where Asylum-Seeking Honduran Petitioner Feared Abusive Ex-Partner
The court concluded that the BIA erred in finding that the government had rebutted the future-threat presumption, because it had failed to prove the petitioner’s circumstances had fundamentally changed and that she could avoid harm by relocating within Honduras. (Ortez-Cruz v. Barr, 2/26/20)
CA7 Holds Conditions in Indonesia Did Not Materially Change for Ethnic Chinese and Buddhist Minorities Between 2003 and 2017
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen of the petitioner, an Indonesian citizen of Chinese descent and of Buddhist faith, finding that country conditions had not materially changed since her 2003 removal hearing. (Meriyu v. Barr, 2/26/20)
EOIR Announces Online Option for Checking Case Information
EOIR announced the addition of an online option for checking case information. The new service, available in English and Spanish, allows users to receive the most recent information about a case by inputting a unique A-Number. The automated case information hotline continues to be available.
CA4 Holds IJ in Baltimore Failed to Give Asylum Seeker an Opportunity to Testify
The court vacated the BIA’s summary affirmance of the Baltimore IJ’s rulings and remanded for reconsideration of the petitioner’s asylum claim, finding that her due process rights were violated when an IJ in Baltimore deprived her of an opportunity to testify. (Atemnkeng v. Barr, 1/24/20)
CA5 Holds That Voluntary Adjustment to LPR Status Terminates Asylee Status
The court denied the petition for review, holding that petitioner’s voluntary and successful adjustment to LPR status ended his status as an asylee, and that the first IJ’s asylum decision in 1992 lacked preclusive effect on the second IJ’s asylum decision in 2014. (Ali v. Barr, 2/24/20)
Advocates Express Concerns and Request Written Response to Unanswered Questions After Laredo Tent Court Tour
On 2/21/20, AILA and other advocates sent a letter following up on a 1/24/20 trip to the Laredo tent court. In this letter, the organizations expressed concerns regarding the implementation of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) and requested written confirmation of DHS’ policy for the program.
Three Mothers File Class Action Lawsuit Seeking Medical and Mental Health Services After Family Separation
The government agreed to dropped its appeal of an order that required the government to provide mental health treatment for migrant parents whose children were separated from them at the border. (Ms. J.P., et al., v. Barr, 2/21/20)
Defending Freedom Needs More Than Heroes – Governments Must Be Accountable
In this blog post, AILA Director of Government Relations Greg Chen calls for change as he describes the dichotomy with how the Venezuelan opposition leader was hailed at the State of the Union and how vulnerable Venezuelan asylum seekers are treated at the border.
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Chinese Petitioner Who Was Detained and Beaten by Police for Reading a Bible at Work
The court affirmed the BIA’s decision upholding the IJ’s denial of asylum, concluding that petitioner—a citizen of China who was detained for 23 hours, interrogated, and beaten by the police after being caught reading a Bible at work—did not suffer past persecution. (Gao v. Barr, 2/20/20)
GAO Releases Report on Actions Needed to Strengthen USCIS’s Oversight and Data Control of Credible and Reasonable Fear Screenings
After analyzing USCIS and EOIR data on fear screenings and processes for workload management, and USCIS policies and procedures, GAO recommended that USCIS provide additional training to asylum officers, systematically record case outcomes, and collect and analyze information on case delays.
TRAC Reports Jump in Asylum Decisions in FY2020
TRAC reports that the pace of deciding asylum cases is up sharply in the first quarter of FY2020 during which 33,194 cases were decided compared to 67,520 cases for all of FY2019. So far, 13,082 individuals have been granted some form of relief from removal and 8,828 individuals granted asylum.
CA11 Remands Asylum Claim of Homosexual Muslim from Guinea Based on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Granting the petition for review and remanding, the court concluded that the petitioner, a homosexual Muslim from Guinea, had established deficient performance by his counsel and had shown that his counsel’s deficiencies had prejudiced his case. (Sow v. Att’y Gen., 2/14/20)
CA3 Holds District Court Can Review Certain “Now-or-Never” Claims Brought by Detained Noncitizens
The court held that when a detained noncitizen seeks relief that a court of appeals cannot meaningfully provide on a petition for review of a final order of removal, INA §§242(a)(4) and (b)(9) do not bar consideration of those claims by a district court. (E.O.H.C. v. DHS, et al., 2/13/20)